|
Post by ironcladgames on Sept 16, 2016 21:14:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Sept 17, 2016 12:23:55 GMT
Woot ! Great news to us all (well Martian players at least, not so much human forces - especially riverine units).
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Sept 17, 2016 12:42:23 GMT
Good idea to replace the heavy pewter bases. I put my hover drones on spare Battlefleet Gothic ship bases, similar to IC's but round, and having 4 different stem heights.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Sept 21, 2016 16:51:00 GMT
The clear plastic flight bases are a welcome change.
As near as I know, even Citadel buys them.
Now, if they have a variant to extend control range, they will be very dangerous to riverine units. They are also able to infiltrate certain obstacles.
Martin is very happy.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Sept 22, 2016 10:34:19 GMT
I agree the clear bases are far superior! Yes, with more range, the Hover becomes a real threat to naval craft and they already are against riverine units with the closer ranges those incur. Effectively, Hovers are good up to 22"(12" move range & 10" light heat ray). With the various ideas on increasing the range of controllers, I could foresee the logical Relay Hover in a group of 3 allowing an armed Hover to get quite up close to a lot of ships. Controller to Relay Hover 1 @12" + Relay Hover 2 @24" + Relay Hover 3 @36" + Armed Hover @48" + 10" heat ray = 58" range of attack. Sounds like the short range guns on a ship just took on more importance. Hmm if they ever figure out how to 'hover' a Shock drone, things could be quite dicey. We won't even entertain a 'hovered' Grenadier!
|
|
|
Post by scottwashburn on Sept 22, 2016 11:11:18 GMT
The whole issue of drone control range is going to be gnawing at me when I start writing Book 3 of my series. I've got no problem with the drones NEEDING a controller. Because of the tremendous capability of Martian minds (ability to do complex calculations quickly, total recall, fantastic multi-tasking capabilities) their computer technology is actually rather primitive; far less advanced than our current computers. So we don't see self-directing drones, they all have to be controlled directly by a Martian. But I can not see any technical reason why the control ranges would be so short (except for game-balance or course). It's not like we are doing space combat where light-speed time delays could restrict the control range of a drone. On a ground battlefield the control range should be pretty much anything you like. But that's no fun in a game. The Martian player would just keep his slavers in the rear, behind cover, and the human player could never knock them out. Have to think about this...
|
|
|
Post by boxholder on Sept 22, 2016 14:58:25 GMT
For the reasons that Mr Wahsburn cites, I feel that the control range of drones should be only as far as the controlling unit can see - line of sight - maximum. If controller cannot see it, the drone goes stupid and does nothing. Except perhaps just walks in a straight line on its last heading. Alternatively, it might be required to face-about and walk until LOS/control is restored.
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Sept 22, 2016 17:03:31 GMT
For the reasons that Mr Wahsburn cites, I feel that the control range of drones should be only as far as the controlling unit can see - line of sight - maximum. If controller cannot see it, the drone goes stupid and does nothing. Except perhaps just walks in a straight line on its last heading. Alternatively, it might be required to face-about and walk until LOS/control is restored. How would that work with terrain that blocks LOS? There's presumably some sort of electronic signal (or psychic ability) involved which shouldn't be affected by intervening features that block LOS. I wouldn't mind a slight increase in drone control range but as said, if too long it will be hard to destroy the controllers and the game will become unbalanced.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Sept 22, 2016 17:16:36 GMT
I think LOS is a very important limit on drone control range.
If the martians used Infra-red (IR) instead of radio frequency (RF) for bandwidth, this would: A) limit the range of their communication B) be a good reason why the Martians can't intercept human radio communication: Martians don't use RF. C) be a reason why the Humans can't intercept Martian communication, because humans know nothing about IR at the time.
I think if the Martians have to "daisy chain" relay drones they will have the ability to deal with human obstacles and human long-range guns, but this ability will require a lot of skill and the Humans can counter this, albeit with skill and courage on their part.
The Navies of the world had quick-fire and rapid fire guns before the first invasion. They were initially important to counter "torpedo boats" but now they will be important to deal with hover drones. (Quick-fire means shell and propellent are in one cartridge. Rapid fire means some sort of automatic loading)
IRL: The standard us tank gun in WWII was a 75mm field gun, derived from the French quick fire 1890 gun. The three-inch gun, 76.2mm, was a hypervelocity gun derived from a Naval AA gun. The 3-inch was much more powerful, but much heavier, gun.
In AQMF, I'd suggest the US Navy would have a 2-inch Hotchkiss Rapid fire gun too heavy to be used anywhere but on a ship. Not only is the weapon heavy, it has significant recoil and has a vast appetite for ammunition.
2-inch Hotchkiss Range: 50 inches ROF: 3 Power: +3 Each gun would probably cost 90 points, maybe more. Shipboard use only.
|
|
|
Post by terrance on Sept 22, 2016 19:49:20 GMT
I think LOS is a very important limit on drone control range. If the martians used Infra-red (IR) instead of radio frequency (RF) for bandwidth, this would: A) limit the range of their communication B) be a good reason why the Martians can't intercept human radio communication: Martians don't use RF. C) be a reason why the Humans can't intercept Martian communication, because humans know nothing about IR at the time. A while back I wrote up a post on the biology, culture, and technology of the Martians. In that post I proposed the Martians use FM radio for communication and drone control. FM would be undetectable by humans at this point in time. Here is a link to the old post: aqmf.freeforums.net/thread/360/martians
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Sept 22, 2016 21:50:53 GMT
FM would indeed be indecipherable, possibly undetectable, by humans. IIRC, FM has a more limited range and requires more power than AM, although FM is less dependent on LOS.
|
|
|
Post by tenchuu on Sept 23, 2016 4:10:03 GMT
LoS could be problematic, not least because you can say goodbye to slavers on short legs. RF at short ranges (for RF) would be better. Maybe the martians are poor at amplification. Or maybe for some mysterious reason radio waves travel more easily on Mars because of less background noise from magneto sphere emissions (insert your pseudoscience here). I like the idea of repeaters. Ways for the slavers not to immediately get blown up, but making them have to take a risk if they lose a repeater.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Sept 23, 2016 9:58:48 GMT
I'm being a little contrite in all this. First, a look at any of my ship data shows numerous small caliber guns for countering 'torpedo boats' or hover drones. Second, the whole of the ranges used in AQMF are totally based on game play, certainly not IRL ranges. Indeed, the game has no 'scale' (e.i. 1" = X yards or such). And with that, the prospect of trying to decipher the Martian controller goes out the window. For both game balance and ease of play, the current 12" controller range works well enough. The Martian player has plan and be careful with his controllers or take enough of them not to be concerned over a lack of them. With the Reaper as a controller as well, you have some 'heavy' Slavers that can get closer. A Slaver is half the value of an Assault tripod so two for one is possible point wise & you have to figure the Slaver drivers are lower in the Martian pecking order by nature of what they do. And the Humans have some chance at stopping the fearsome advance of lots of drones. Against a skilled Martian player, the odds are against the human forces. But there is certainly more of a game with the current ranges, which is after all 1/4 the width of the table being crossed (in a 4 x 6' 'long' table)in the original rules. I for one feel the current 12" range is fine as is and that we should perhaps consider the Martian control to be by telepathy as is most of their communications. Admitted, its a syfy fall back, but; it keeps it simple, precludes a majority of human interception, and allows us to get back to the gaming within the framework we're used too. Two comments on that last statement. First, the possibility of human telepathes makes for a niche in this war, although I tried and failed to get the idea out that we might have counter comms on the Martians. No problem, I was never much a fan, even though it was well done in Starship Troopers. Second, this allows humans to continue to have some superiority in naval forces that can help counter the tech advantage of the Martians. Although Mike's 'Ship Bane Tripods' will swing that a lot, they're rare and can be stopped at a price. Again, its a game.
|
|
|
Post by mikedski on Sept 23, 2016 11:46:25 GMT
Hover drones should not get terrain defense or armor bonuses, right? I suspect they are quite vulnerable as they are hovering at the same pace as a creepy crawly drone and not flying.
How high are they hovering?
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Sept 23, 2016 12:02:59 GMT
Good question. I doubt the game designers meant for them to fly very high, just high enough to cross rubble, ruins, marshes and water features, not fly over trees and tall buildings.
|
|